SuperCachetes
Mar 1, 10:48 AM
I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
Negative consequences? :rolleyes:
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
Endangering themselves? And a Catholic website as backup? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wow. Just wow.
At least we're back to the childhood anecdotes again - so in between reading all the ignorant, antiquated, religion-clouded bollocks you are spewing, we can find a little entertainment value.
magbarn
Apr 9, 09:23 AM
Intel did indeed force Apple to use their IGP by not licensing other vendors to provide IGPs. The reason the MBP 13" and MBA 13" use IGPs and not dedicated GPU is one of space. Apple can't magically conjure up space on the logic board.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I push the GPU more often than I push the CPU on my MBA. I doubt I'm in the minority, though I'm probably part of the minority that actual knows this little fact. ;)
No matter how much you try to spin this, Intel got greedy on this one and couldn't back their greed with competence. They have sucked at GPUs since they have been in the GPU game (Intel i740 anyone ?).
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
zoran
Oct 15, 01:05 PM
How long did macPro delay compared to HPs similar workstation?
gugy
Aug 16, 11:02 PM
That's great that Adobe apps runs well under Rosetta in the new Mac Pro.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
It makes very tempting to buy one.
My only concern comes to any Rev.A of any hardware.
I'll wait and buy the next version of Mac Pro. I think then, even under Rosetta Adobe apps will fly in comparison to the Quad G5. Can't wait for the universal apps though.
Huhn
Mar 22, 02:53 PM
According to the hate, Apple Fanboys are giving those new competitors....it seems like it is the first real competition. Get out of your homes guys and girls and compare.... I own an iPhone 4 and a MBP, but came from and Android phone and guess what? The UI is way better than those ugly millions of square buttons that you see on the iPhone. I still prefer it...because of other reasons like battery and the built in ipod.
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
Canon EOS Rebel T1i EF-S
Back to Canon EOS Rebel T1i
canon rebel eos t1i.
canon rebel eos t1i. sinsin07
(Or Canon EOS Rebel T1i in
Canon#39;s EOS Rebel T1i: DSLR
Canon EOS Rebel T1i : Back
Canon EOS T1i Rebel 500D
Canon#39;s new EOS Rebel T1i
the Canon EOS Rebel T1i vs
for CANON REBEL EOS T1i XS
Canon Eos Rebel T1i,
canon rebel t1i eos 500d.
canon rebel t1i box. canon
Samsung now has the thinnest Tablet with a dual core, plus still better camera and a much nicer UI. I would rather buy that one than the iPad, just because....uhm well i don�t have to send my files (all type of files) by email to myself to transfer them? and maybe i wanna exchange files with workmates without using an adapter the whole time. Maybe i really wanna use and work with that thing than playing games and watching movies or browsing (guess thats what 95% do with their iPad).
hyperpasta
Aug 5, 04:02 PM
There is no way in the world Apple will be putting iSights in the Cinema Displays.
Well iSight or no, there needs to be an update anyway. The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk? The new Cinema Displays need an IR "extender".
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
Well iSight or no, there needs to be an update anyway. The Mac Pro will have Front Row, and how will you control it by remote if you're meant to keep it under your desk? The new Cinema Displays need an IR "extender".
Besides, I still think Apple WOULD love to include an iSight in their displays.
chimerical
Nov 28, 07:42 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
jonnysods
Apr 6, 02:24 PM
Man alive, if that's the nearest competitor investors must be feeling pretty good with Apple right now.
I certainly love my iPad.
I certainly love my iPad.
jwhitnah
Aug 8, 12:34 AM
anyone else a little underwhelmed with today's WWDC? There isn't anything that really jumped out at me besides the Mac Pro.
Mac Pro looks very nice. Now I am sure they will uodate their LCDs, so I do not want one/two and Leopard is a very modest refinement. They should have had system restore like MS years ago. Not a compelling upgrade, but I will buy it. Sigh.
Mac Pro looks very nice. Now I am sure they will uodate their LCDs, so I do not want one/two and Leopard is a very modest refinement. They should have had system restore like MS years ago. Not a compelling upgrade, but I will buy it. Sigh.
Michael383
Apr 6, 12:14 PM
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
Would be nice to see a 15" MBA.
Would be nice to see a 15" MBA.
Moyank24
Mar 2, 10:01 PM
Hes a quack.
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2009/02/more-on-phony-expert-john-r.html
Heres a nicely done documenting of the doctors distortions too: http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoja/John%20R.%20Diggs's%20lies.pdf
And here is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about him:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/under-attack-gays-remain-minority-mos
I figured the research and findings were a little skewed when they found that lesbians had more heterosexual sex than heterosexual women did. :rolleyes:
MacsRgr8
Aug 6, 01:56 PM
why do you think so? Conroe chips showed up online a few weeks ago, and woodcrest has been shipping to manufacturers for some time now. Merom hasn't, Conroe is ahead of Merom in terms of shipping IIRC.
You're right.
I got it the wrong way round. somehow I believed the Merom's to be already shipping, and not the Conroe, But as others have stated too, it's the Conroe which already has seen some daylight!
Makes it difficult though.
Will the Mac Pro low(er) end get the Conroe?
And only the top end (presumably a Quad config) a Woodcrest?
Can't wait!!
You're right.
I got it the wrong way round. somehow I believed the Merom's to be already shipping, and not the Conroe, But as others have stated too, it's the Conroe which already has seen some daylight!
Makes it difficult though.
Will the Mac Pro low(er) end get the Conroe?
And only the top end (presumably a Quad config) a Woodcrest?
Can't wait!!
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:40 PM
So how many people in the world do you think have cell phones? Everyone?!?! Just doing a quick Google search, there were about 1.1billion cell users in the world in 2004. So, maybe it's up to 1.5 - 1.75bil now?
Now if there's ~700mil people in the EU with a workforce just under 400mil strong and internet usage is about 300mil. Ya, it would seem reasonable that roughly the same number of people use cell phones. Do you have a better estimate? I'm sure there's a lot of elderly, children, and poor in the 700mil that use cell phones, eh?
What about India, Japan, China? First of all, India and China have median incomes that are FAR less than the US or EU... so I doubt they have a relatively large cellular user base.
And oh, let me check with my cubemate.... yep, CDMA is used in parts of China.
Well, I dont know where to begin... I work in science and you have to trust me when I say that you can't deduct anything from the "facts" you have. You are guessing.
The fact is that GSM has 81% of the world market... and that makes cdma a small market.
Now if there's ~700mil people in the EU with a workforce just under 400mil strong and internet usage is about 300mil. Ya, it would seem reasonable that roughly the same number of people use cell phones. Do you have a better estimate? I'm sure there's a lot of elderly, children, and poor in the 700mil that use cell phones, eh?
What about India, Japan, China? First of all, India and China have median incomes that are FAR less than the US or EU... so I doubt they have a relatively large cellular user base.
And oh, let me check with my cubemate.... yep, CDMA is used in parts of China.
Well, I dont know where to begin... I work in science and you have to trust me when I say that you can't deduct anything from the "facts" you have. You are guessing.
The fact is that GSM has 81% of the world market... and that makes cdma a small market.
JAT
Mar 22, 03:57 PM
The prices are official. Stop this fanboy **** about "it's not released yet".
Xoom has been released and sells well, although not so much as the iPad, but it still grabs some market share.
You people keep trying to find problems where there are no problems.
It's an official announcement, the tablets are officially coming with an official price that makes real front to the iPad, you accepting it or not.
It's like you fanboy people hate the fact that competitors are doing well.
The Galaxy Tab 8.9 and 10.1 are thinner than the iPad 2, that must be too much for fanboys hearts.
I don't own any tablet. I've used an iPad, and found little purpose to owning one myself at this time. That said, I am impressed with what it can do, esp as a gaming and business device. The others....meh.
"Fanboy" is much more readily applied to someone fawning over a product that is not yet shipping, and claiming it is superior to one that is shipping. Such assertions are absolutely ridiculous. These products aren't "doing well", they are not yet available.
I find fanboy assertions amusing, hence I post on occasion. :cool:
Xoom has been released and sells well, although not so much as the iPad, but it still grabs some market share.
You people keep trying to find problems where there are no problems.
It's an official announcement, the tablets are officially coming with an official price that makes real front to the iPad, you accepting it or not.
It's like you fanboy people hate the fact that competitors are doing well.
The Galaxy Tab 8.9 and 10.1 are thinner than the iPad 2, that must be too much for fanboys hearts.
I don't own any tablet. I've used an iPad, and found little purpose to owning one myself at this time. That said, I am impressed with what it can do, esp as a gaming and business device. The others....meh.
"Fanboy" is much more readily applied to someone fawning over a product that is not yet shipping, and claiming it is superior to one that is shipping. Such assertions are absolutely ridiculous. These products aren't "doing well", they are not yet available.
I find fanboy assertions amusing, hence I post on occasion. :cool:
ergle2
Sep 13, 01:00 PM
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
I think you've misunderstood.
Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest are one microarch now. That's Intel's point -- the core is essentially the same. Then they package as appropriate for a given market. Merom is lower-voltage/lower-clockspeed, Woodcrest has the external pins for multi-processor exposed and has a higher FSB, etc.
There will still be different chips for different markets, but the arch is the same across the board. This is a significant difference from the Pentium-4/Pentium-M days, where the arch was very, very different.
The other big difference is the support chipsets -- the Xeon range use a different chipset that supports FBDIMM vs DDR2 for the Core 2 branded chips. This is the reason Intel kept the memory controller off the CPU die, so that they had more flexibility with memory types.
arkitect
Mar 4, 03:41 AM
There is no risk of destroying society.
I never realised we had such power�
Earthquakes when we have sex and now getting married destroys whole societies.
;)
We are SO screwed!
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kysrpgpMw31qzkf1ao1_500.jpg
I never realised we had such power�
Earthquakes when we have sex and now getting married destroys whole societies.
;)
We are SO screwed!
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kysrpgpMw31qzkf1ao1_500.jpg
zelet
Aug 25, 04:57 PM
Just out of curiosity... what kind of problems could you possibly have with .mac? I mean, I've never had any email problems, Setting it up in Mail is as simple as possible... the online interface is simple...
I dunno... hearing people complain about customer service regarding .mac seems funny to me. What types of problems have you had with it?
Well, recently there have been problems with people having their mail bounced back to them because somehow the dotMac smtp servers were blacklisted by spamcop and a few other services. They have been having pretty bad, though geographically localized, service disruptions. Friends of mine have also complained that mail they send to me are sometimes bounced back with a "This account doesn't exist" error message even though they have sent me mail before and after the event (yes, they verified the email address).
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
I dunno... hearing people complain about customer service regarding .mac seems funny to me. What types of problems have you had with it?
Well, recently there have been problems with people having their mail bounced back to them because somehow the dotMac smtp servers were blacklisted by spamcop and a few other services. They have been having pretty bad, though geographically localized, service disruptions. Friends of mine have also complained that mail they send to me are sometimes bounced back with a "This account doesn't exist" error message even though they have sent me mail before and after the event (yes, they verified the email address).
So, in summary, there are a lot of problems that shouldn't occur with a $100 a year service. DotMac should be at least a 99% uptime service for that kind of money.
Xenious
Jul 14, 05:27 PM
Dual drive slots are cool, but the design is boring. Don't get me wrong I love my G5 powermac I was just hoping for a new or different design for the next ones...Maybe the same but square or smaller or something. Oh well it doesn't matter I'm still buying. :)
rezenclowd3
Nov 25, 09:49 PM
I hated Shift, it seemed to me to pretend to be a sim, at the same time acknowledging it was an arcade game. I can't stand AI that will try to get revenge anyway, as that should be black flagged. Race clean or gtfo IMO. If one happens to drive dirty accidentally online, do your own stop and go but let the offended gain your place. If you CAN'T pass cleanly due to skill, always get out of the way like you are being lapped, DO NOT try to defend.
rjohnstone
Apr 19, 06:58 PM
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this..
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
What is the pic on the bottom? That ain't no Samsung tablet. Looks like a photoshop job.
All Samsung tabs have SAMSUNG blazed across the top of the face.
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010-11-04_174623.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/pn_20101104170853.jpg
http://pk.funnyseoul.com/2010/11/galaxy-tab-released/
What is the pic on the bottom? That ain't no Samsung tablet. Looks like a photoshop job.
All Samsung tabs have SAMSUNG blazed across the top of the face.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:35 PM
I completely agree, but let's be honest, Apple and Microsoft fans are no different.
One important fact to consider:
"If there were no fans, there would be no game!"
One important fact to consider:
"If there were no fans, there would be no game!"
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
puggles
Jun 13, 12:37 AM
Will radio shack be selling the bumpers?
Multimedia
Aug 27, 10:59 AM
Speaking of wish expectations Multimedia;
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.I don't expect the Santa Rosa setup to be ready before Leopard is next Spring. I was going to wait that long. But hanging out here makes me want something this Fall once Core 2 is in full swing - IE some of it hits the refurb page. :p
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature. MacBook is really a bargain @ $949 refurb. I may even go for just a bottom of the line 1.66 GHz C2D refurb mini. But my penchant for spanning says a $949 MacBook at least. I've been a spanner since it became possible in 1986. Find one screen impossably confining - ESP since the 24" is also a TV most of the time thanks to Elgato's amazing EyeTV technologies.
Mac Pro does crush video about 33% faster than this Quad G5 does. Still not fast enough. But significantly faster than I can do it now. But so might the MacBook. I really can't say yet. My mind is in flux. Still have to test Core 2 Duo performance Vs. Mac Pro for my particular video crushing needs. Two bottom of the line Minis may be an option as well.
I know you're hangin' out for Santa Rosa. The article mentions that it's expected in early 2007. Do you think that would be the date for official announcement of production-standard architecture, or actual availability announcement?
Seems very early to be shipping...
I could go out in September and get a Merom notebook, but I don't mind waiting 6 months for Santa Rosa to hit the street.I don't expect the Santa Rosa setup to be ready before Leopard is next Spring. I was going to wait that long. But hanging out here makes me want something this Fall once Core 2 is in full swing - IE some of it hits the refurb page. :p
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature. MacBook is really a bargain @ $949 refurb. I may even go for just a bottom of the line 1.66 GHz C2D refurb mini. But my penchant for spanning says a $949 MacBook at least. I've been a spanner since it became possible in 1986. Find one screen impossably confining - ESP since the 24" is also a TV most of the time thanks to Elgato's amazing EyeTV technologies.
Mac Pro does crush video about 33% faster than this Quad G5 does. Still not fast enough. But significantly faster than I can do it now. But so might the MacBook. I really can't say yet. My mind is in flux. Still have to test Core 2 Duo performance Vs. Mac Pro for my particular video crushing needs. Two bottom of the line Minis may be an option as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment